• Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education
• /
• v.29 no.2
• /
• pp.253-266
• /
• 2009

This study was focused on analyzing students' informal reasoning patterns and their considerations in decision-making on socioscientific issues. This study involved 20 undergraduate students (10 biology majors and 10 non-biology majors) and showed how the two groups responded on socioscientific issues. Semi-structured interviews were conducted twice respectively based on six scenarios of gene therapy and human cloning. The result showed 93% of the total number of participants' decisions were made by rationalistic reasoning, whereas emotional reasoning was 49%, and intuitive reasoning was 27%. Students usually used two or three informal reasoning patterns together. Most of the students took more consideration on social factors. Some perceived ethical and moral implications of the issues, but they did not consider them seriously. They made their decisions depending on their own values, etc. 65% of the participants got their information on socioscientific issues from the mass media. Biology majors hardly used intuitive reasoning compared to non-biology majors. The Biology major group took into deep considerations on socioscientific issues while the non-biology major group seemed to interpret the given scenarios simply. This implied that the content knowledge was a significant factor of their decision-making. Therefore, it is necessary to develop proper science courses for non-major students to improve their decision-making on socioscientific issues. So, when we develop educational materials or programs, we should consider students' reasoning patterns, their considerations in decision-making, and their content knowledge. And because the mass media has the potential to play a key role for an effective education, we need to make a plan to make a practical application.

• Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education
• /
• v.33 no.1
• /
• pp.79-93
• /
• 2013

This study examined value-judgement and decision-making process of middle school students on three biotechnology related socioscientific issues (SSI) (i.e. designer baby, amniotic fluid test, and embryonic stem cell research). In particular, it focused on the level of consistency in their value application to the decisions. Twenty 8th grade students participated in the SSI program. The participants were asked to mark their positions on each issue before and after the debates. All classroom and sub-group debates were audio-recorded. The researcher conducted individual interviews with 10 students after the program. The results show three patterns emerging. First, five students applied their personal values in a consistent manner when making decisions on the three consecutive issues. Second, three students demonstrated incremental resoluteness in their value application as the sessions proceeded and had tendency to be oriented towards a specific value, more so towards the end of the program than the beginning. And third, four students gradually showed ambivalence in their decisions as they participate in the program. The results suggest that science teachers addressing SSI need to encourage students to be aware of their own values and to engage in internalized decision-making in light of those values. They also need to be aware of the possible challenges that students might feel in their decision-making process caused by the complexity of SSI.

• Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education
• /
• v.37 no.2
• /
• pp.323-334
• /
• 2017

Current science education aims to guide students as future responsible citizens to make informed decisions on socioscientific issues (SSI). In the authors' previous study, it was found that conceptions of nature of technology (NOT) were explicitly represented in various contexts of SSI with differentiated levels of understanding, and cases of the informed NOT understanding included the key features of well-reasoned SSI decision-making. Therefore, enhancing NOT understanding could be one of the elements to leverage students' informed SSI decision-making. In this study, we developed a rubric to assess NOT understanding in the context of SSI and applied it to evaluate the impact of SSI instruction. Participants were 58 college students who took an SSI course for 6 weeks. Before and after the SSI course, they were asked to write decision-making essays on the Golden Rice issue (a type of genetically modified food). As a result of analyzing the pre- and post decision-making essay using the rubric, it was found that NOT understanding was improved after the SSI course; in addition, the salient patterns of NOT changes were analyzed in detail in order to gauge the influence of the SSI classes. Implications for science education were discussed.

• Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education
• /
• v.38 no.4
• /
• pp.467-480
• /
• 2018

This study aims to investigate how flipped learning-based socioscientific issue instruction (FL-SSI instruction) affected middle school students' key competencies and character development. Traditional classrooms are constrained in terms of time and resources for exploring the issues and making decision on SSI. To address these concerns, we designed and implemented an SSI instruction adopting flipped learning. Seventy-three 8th graders participated in an SSI program on four topics for over 12 class periods. Two questionnaires were used as a main data source to measure students' key competencies and character development before and after the SSI instruction. In addition, student responses and shared experience from focus group interviews after the instruction were collected and analyzed. The results indicate that the students significantly improved their key competencies and experienced character development after the SSI instruction. The students presented statistically significant improvement in the key competencies (i.e., collaboration, information and technology, critical thinking and problem-solving, and communication skills) and in two out of three factors in character and values as global citizens (social and moral compassion, and socio-scientific accountability). Interview data supports the quantitative results indicating that SSI instruction with a flipped learning strategy provided students in-depth and rich learning opportunities. The students responded that watching web-based videos prior to class enabled them to deeply understand the issue and actively engage in discussion and debate once class began. Furthermore, the resulting gains in available class time deriving from a flipped learning approach allowed the students to examine the issue from diverse perspectives.

• Journal of Science Education
• /
• v.41 no.2
• /
• pp.167-178
• /
• 2017

It has been suggested that character education, taught only in ethics and social science, should be integrated into other subjects including science education. In terms of inquiry and the nature of science, science education is related to character education, which is emphasized by SSI (Socioscientific Issue) education. Followed by necessity of character education, the Character Education Promotion Act was established in 2015. To investigate what and how character education is conducting in schools, analysis of curriculums and textbooks is needed in terms of elements underlined in the Character Education Promotion Act. For this purpose, this research analyzed general remarks and science sections in the 2009 revised and the 2015 revised curriculums and science textbooks based on the 2009 revised curriculum with regard to essential virtues in the Character Education Promotion Act. Results showed that parts of essential virtues were included in both curriculums, of which elements were inconsistent with those of science textbooks. Curriculums and textbooks reflecting whole elements faithfully need to be developed.

• Journal of Science Education
• /
• v.47 no.1
• /
• pp.11-23
• /
• 2023

In this study, we examined the effect of socioscientific issue (SSI) based science lessons on underachieving 9th-grade students. A total of seven lessons centered on two SSIs related to the national science curriculum were developed and implemented during the first semester of 2021. Data were collected from 185 9th-grade students in one middle school in a mid-sized city of South Korea. Among them, 37 were identified as achieving far below the standards (underachieving students hereafter). Quantitative data were collected from pre- and post-tests on basic science content and attitudes and competency measures. To supplement quantitative data, lesson observation notes were recorded, and student interviews with a selected number of students were conducted. The analysis of quantitative data was conducted through the Wilcoxon Signed Rank Test and paired t-tests. Qualitative data were analyzed to find reasons for changing attitudes. The findings showed that the SSI-based lessons were more effective on underachieving students than the others in enhancing basic academic achievement, while there was no significant effect on all in attitudes and competency. Lesson observation data showed that underachieving students were more engaged in SSI-based lessons than before. Student interviews demonstrated several reasons why they were engaged, suggesting the aspects of SSI-based lessons that facilitated underachieving students' learning. Further research topics are suggested.

• Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education
• /
• v.37 no.6
• /
• pp.911-920
• /
• 2017

The purpose of the study is to investigate the effects of community-based SSI programs (SSI-COMM) regarding "fine dust" on promoting middle school students' understanding of community issues and their character and values as citizens. SSI-COMM on fine dust was implemented in 4 middle schools located in Seoul, and 151 7th graders participated in the program lasting over 8 weeks. Data was collected through two questionnaires (i.e. students' understanding of issues, and character and values as citizens) and individual interviews with selected students. Results indicated that there were statistically significant increases in their understanding of fine dust issue after the program. In addition, the program significantly contributed to enhancing students' character and values, especially in the domains of social and moral compassion and socioscientific accountability. Student interviews revealed that they became more aware of the local community problems caused by fine dusts and started to consider what efforts should be made to solve them. They also felt individual responsibility for the occurrence of fine dust, and the need for participation and practice of community activities for vulnerable groups in affected areas.

• Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education
• /
• v.35 no.5
• /
• pp.895-905
• /
• 2015

Citizens should be sensitive to the complex and controversial SSIs (Socioscientific Issues), be able to make a responsible decision with evidence and empathy, and furthermore take political action for the larger welfare. The premise of this research is that understanding the nature of science (NOS) takes an important role when students and adults participate in the discourse on SSIs because SSI reasoning requires individuals to examine information and counter-information with skepticism. We therefore designed SSI programs that were incorporated with NOS by adapting a contextualized-reflective approach. The leading research question was to what extent SSI contexts contributed to promoting students' understanding of NOS. A total of 71 11th grade students participated in this program. The school was located in an urban city near the capital city of Seoul, South Korea. We designed SSI programs to cover the issues of genetically modified organisms, climate change, and nuclear energy. Each issue required four to six class periods to complete. We conducted pre- and post-program tests using the revised VNOS-C, recorded group discussions or debates and collected student worksheets to observe the increase of student NOS understanding. As a result of this program, students showed moderate improvement in their understanding of NOS.

• Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education
• /
• v.28 no.5
• /
• pp.495-505
• /
• 2008

The purpose of this study was to analyze the level of evidence used in gifted elementary students' argumentation. The subjects were 15, 5th and 6th grade students selected in the Science Education Institute for Gifted Youth in K University. After the argumentation task was given to students 2 weeks ago, the students grouped themselves in the affirmative and negative and took part in a debate for 2 hours. Their argumentation process was observed, recorded and transcribed for analysis. Transcribed data was given a Protocol Number according to priority and was examined to find out what were the characteristics when students participated in the task. The evidence used in argumentation was graded from level 1 to level 6 according to Perella's Hierarchy of Evidence and the rate of frequency classified by the level was expressed in graph. Students used Level 1- Level 2 evidence above 50% without for or against task. They had weak argumentation making use of low-level evidence such as individual experience, opinion and another person's experience rather than objective evidences. On the other hand, students commented on the lack of opponent's evidence when they could not trust an opponent's evidence. If one team asked the other to present more evidence but could not, they disregarded the question and turned to another topic. And in cases where the opponent team refuted with evidences of high level, the other team just repeated their claim or evaded the rebuttal. The students tended to complete the argument without the same conclusions with some interruptions. The results show that we need an educational programs including scientific argumentation for science-gifted elementary school students.